Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 19.2 points higher (57.6 vs 38.4) but costs 1.6× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $5294; both flagship class). Pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-5.5 (Xhigh).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 38.4 | −33.3% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 33.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $5,294.36 | −39.2% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 39.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 670.18s | 55.87s | −91.7% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 91.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $5.00 / $30.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 33.3% less intelligence, 39.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 91.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/gpt-5-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/gpt-5-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill